An editorial on research and development in and with educational technology (original) (raw)
Related papers
I have asked my co-editors at Educational Technology Research & Development (ETR&D) for an opportunity to share a few reflections as my 15 years of service as ETR&D Development Editor draws to a close. These few remarks represent my reflections about some of the things I have observed over the years. The categories into which I have chosen to group these reflections are: (a) writing, publishing, and editing; (b) instructional design and technology research; and (c) attitudes and abilities. The main messages I try to convey are: (a) simple, descriptive language tends to promote understanding, (b) advocacy can easily lead to over-promising and loss of confidence in our professional discipline, and (c) humility and open-minded inquiry are essential for learning and instruction. Some of these remarks may seem disconnected and unnecessarily personal. That is a risk one takes when trying to express what one genuinely believes. I do hope these thoughts will provoke others, as I have been provoked to learn more and more over the years.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 2010
Scientific communication in the field of educational technology was examined by analyzing references from and citations to articles published in Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D) for the period 1990-2004 with particular emphasis on other journals found in the citation record. Data were collected on the 369 core articles found in the 60 issues published during that time period, their reference lists (containing over 14,805 individual items), and citations of those articles in other journals (1,896 entries). The top cited and citing journals during that time period are listed. Nine symbiotic journals (i.e. those that are most cited by ETR&D and frequently cite it) were identified: Contemporary the Review of Educational Research. The results provide an in-depth, quantitative view of informal connections within the field via the citation record. Implications for further research and the potential influence of new technologies on scientific communication are also discussed.
Education Technology: An Evidence-Based Review
2017
for providing helpful and detailed comments as we put together this review. We also thank Rachel Glennerster for detailed support throughout the project, Jessica Mardo and Sophie Shank for edits, and to the Spencer Foundation for financial support. Any errors or omissions are our own. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.
Perspectives on educational technology research and development
Educational Technology Research and Development, 1989
This is the introductory article for the first issue ofEducational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D). The authors review the issues and process that led to the decision by the AECT Executive Board to co-publishEducational Communication and Technology Journal (ECTJ) and theJournal of Instructional Development (JID) in a new journal. The results of analyses of ECTJ and JID by Schwen and Middendorf (1987) and Dick and Dick (1989) are briefly summarized. The authors then report their own survey of AECT members to determine the topics and types of articles the members would prefer to read in ETR&D. Member preferences are compared with the actual content of the last ten issues of ECTJ and JID. Finally, the authors briefly discuss their own perspectives on ETR&D.
Editorial: Defining the Field of Educational Technology
Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 2010
Looking Forward In closing, the current editorial team continues to be successful in publishing CJLT-RCAT on a regular basis and Jacobsen https://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/rt/printerFriendly/26394/19576 of 3 2018-12-07, 12:08 p.m. have ensured that it remains a high quality, international scholarly journal for educational technology research and scholarship.
Compendium of Education Technology Research Funded by NCER and NCSER: 2002-2014. NCER 2017-0001
2017
In 1999, the National Research Council published a report on the state of education research in the United States. The panel concluded, One striking fact is that the complex world of education-unlike defense, health care, or industrial production-does not rest on a strong research base. In no other field are personal experience and ideology so frequently relied on to make policy choices, and in no other field is the research base so inadequate and little used. National Research Council (1999, p. 1) Three years later with the passage of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Congress established the Institute of Education Sciences (Institute) and charged it with supporting rigorous, scientifically valid research that is relevant to education practice and policy. To meet this charge, the Institute established long-term programs of research within the National Center for Education Research (NCER) and the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER) that address topics of importance to education practitioners and leaders, specify methodological requirements for projects, and establish a scientific peer-review system for reviewing grant proposals. Since the Institute's founding, NCER has funded a broad range of work targeted toward providing solutions to the education problems in our nation. NCSER became part of the Institute with the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that gave the primary authority for special education research within the U.S. Department of Education to the Institute (IDEA 2004). NCSER began operations in 2005 and funds a comprehensive program of special education research designed to expand the knowledge and understanding of infants, toddlers, and children with or at risk for disabilities. Both centers fund four general types of research: exploratory research that contributes to our core knowledge of education, development and piloting of education interventions (e.g., instructional interventions, policies, and technologies), evaluation of the impact of interventions, and development and validation of measurement instruments. Compendia of Research Funded by the Institute This compendium is part of a series of documents intended to summarize the research investments that NCER and NCSER are making to improve student education outcomes in specific topical areas. This compendium organizes and describes projects pertaining to education technology. Other compendia explore projects pertaining to math and science research and to social and behavioral research. The Institute provided the contractors with each project's structured abstract, which became the basis for the project's description in the compendium. It is the Institute's intent that this compendium assist education stakeholders in identifying projects of interest and getting an overview of major research goals and activities; it does not describe the research designs or summarize project findings. Detailed abstracts of all projects in this compendium are available on the Institute's website (http://ies.ed.gov/funding/grantsearch).
Reflections on the state of educational technology research and development
Educational Technology Research and Development, 2000
In this article, I comment on the seven articles that appeared in the special issues of Educational Technology Research and Development (1998, 46(4); 1999, 47(2)) and an associated American Educational Research Association (AERA) symposium, as well as other selected developments in educational technology as presented in a recent edited volume (Jacobson & Kozma, in press). I address the importance of the research and development (R&D) described in these articles and ident~Cy five interconnected themes that cut across many of them: the centrality of design, the enabling capabilities of technology, collaboration with new partners, scaling up of projects, and the use of alternative research methodologies. Together, the projects described in these articles are defining new directions for educational technology that put it at the forefront of educational R&D. At the same time, I direct a critique and challenge to traditional instructional systems design (ISD) technology programs.